Monday, February 06, 2006

In It For The Money

As I enter the back-nine of the Winter term, my postings are going to become more sparse and incoherent (and prone to winded discussions of the OC - thank God Johnny was finally sacrificed to appease the perverted gods of the ever-contracting, incestual Newport world). Somewhere in the next five weeks I am supposed to conjure up a thesis on Transnational Fascist Ideology (yeah, I should probably post about that sometime) and a seminar paper on the Archeology of Fetishism. The latter seems much more exciting (titillating?) as I get to read academic journal articles such as "Freud's 'Fetishism' and the Lesbian Dildo Debates."

Super Bowl XL has come and gone; a mostly dull, lackluster affair. Ben Roethlisberger' s 22.6 (!) quarterback rating was the worst for a winning QB in Super Bowl history. By far the biggest loser of the day (besides all the chumps who bet against me), however, was ABC who [fumbled/punted/was forced to take a safety/threw like A.J. Feeley] throughout the broadcast. When Randel El landed on his head during a punt return, my friends and I were concerned whether he would walk again. The last image before the injury timeout was of Antwaan grabbing his back, but when ABC returned from commercials there was nary a mention of his condition. Was he hurt, paralyzed? We were left in the dark until he mysteriously reappeared on the field a few plays later. That was simply inhumane. ABC similarly left us clueless on stats all game. Fox, despite its penchant for trying ridiculous new camera technologies (bullet-time anyone?), always bombarded the viewer with even the most trivial of details.

And what was up with ABC's series promotions? Shaq pimping out Desperate Housewives, let alone making a free throw? Advertising Grey's Anatomy as anything other than the most insipid hour currently on television (a bomb in the chest, I mean really, come on - two weeks ago the main plot point was whether or not a dog was more important to Grey than George... umm, don't ask)? What marketing genius thought up the Lost + Robert Palmer spot?

Poor form ABC, poor form.

5 Comments:

Anonymous Anonymous said...

If you’re going to be posting on the internets for all the world to see every little thought that crosses your mind, I would thank you very kindly to get your head out of your ass.

If you did, you would have to admit that though ABC did flub the injury coverage, they can’t really be blamed for their spots touting a very specific target market to watch Grey’s Anatomy.

Even though Grey’s has been a crackerjack in the ratings, coming in seventh overall for the week of January 23, (beating your precious Lost), it is clear that the show remains unseen to a very lucrative audience: young men who spend a lot of their discretionary incomes on purchasing decisions largely affected by advertising and marketing. In their efforts to sell the show as less “insipid” than it actually is, ABC is actually selling advertisers many millions of pairs of very valuable “eyeballs. ” The show came in as the third-most-watched after-Superbowl-program of the last twenty years, and this success must be due in no small part to the way the show was marketed during the game.

On the other hand, if your beef is with the show itself, I would first submit that you’re in no real position to comment, having never seen the show. Second, I would ask you: how likely is the most insipid hour of television to feature the exciting possibility that Christina Ricci will blow up into a thousand million pieces? Not very, my friend. Not very. Even if you already want kick Christina Ricci in her fat Kewpie face every time you see her on screen (as I do), you have to admit that the possibility of seeing her blown to pieces is, in fact, far from dull.

Ka-blow! See? That’s not insipid at all.

Tue Feb 07, 02:30:00 PM GMT-7  
Blogger d l wright said...

wow. i got served. god bless your little heart anonymous (even if you are a terrible speller).

while that line, among others, was mostly "lurker" baiting - i have to say i stand partially corrected. i was actually more surprised to see that grey's had leap-frogged desperate housewives in the ratings (although it might have been a repeat that week) since i had assumed it was merely thriving off of paraplegics unable to turn the channel. not that it matters much anyway since all will be crushed, even mac-a-doodle's precious olympics, under the onslaught that is american idol.

here's to hoping that Christina Ricci, ala Kenny, finds a tragic and gruesome end every episode. that will keep those young men watching, because Patrick Dempsey certainly won't.

Tue Feb 07, 03:29:00 PM GMT-7  
Blogger M S Martinez said...

I only know four people who watch Grey's and they are all women.

Ergo only women watch Grey's Anatomy.

Tue Feb 07, 05:13:00 PM GMT-7  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Hee. Overgeneralizations are for homophobes.

But we can agree: American Idol will bring the pain. Or the shit, or whatever. American Idol will bring a world of shit. Perhaps I am a masochist, because it is a world of shit to which I look forward. And thank god that while I trek neck deep through that world, I won’t be troubled by any pesky, misleading promos for insipid programming like Arrested Development. You just can’t make a show that bland look interesting, and bless Fox’s little hearts for ever having tried.

Also, I am a terrible speller, and the content on my blog is not only insipid but also puerile and obtuse. Perfect strangers needn’t be subjected to it just to satisfy their own “curiosity.”

Finally, I may be a former lurker (or am I still a lurker since I comment anonymously?), but at least I’m no devotee.

Tue Feb 07, 05:30:00 PM GMT-7  
Blogger d l wright said...

dev·o·tee
noun
1.an ardent follower, supporter, or enthusiast

sorry, as you now have the record for most comments on our "lambent" blog, you qualify as a devotee.

and goddamnit! i have a mid-term due tomorrow. so for realz, no baiting me with arrested development. i can see your profile right now: you are not fooling anyone.

fin.

p.s. jeremy - if you are reading this somewhere: "you're curious aren't you?"

Tue Feb 07, 06:15:00 PM GMT-7  

Post a Comment

<< Home